Technology Lab —

Virtualization, Windows Server 2012 dominate Microsoft’s TechEd

Hyper-V 3 is looking hot, while Windows Intune 3 has gone live.

At TechEd in Orlando today, Microsoft made a few product announcements and demonstrated a lot of Windows Server 2012's new virtualization features. Microsoft highlighted what is coming soon, especially from Windows Server 2012. Virtualization is the name of the game, and Microsoft showed off migration of virtual machines between on-premises servers and the cloud (using the new Azure virtual machine capability), showcased the scalability of Hyper-V 3 (up to 64 virtual CPUs, 1TB RAM per virtual machine, and a test virtual machine managing more than 900,000 I/O operations per second, bottlenecked only by hardware), and demonstrated management of its virtual switch using software from Cisco.

These capabilities are going to be production-ready soon. For Microsoft, in fact, they're already here; the company said that it has migrated the front-end servers for the Bing search engine to the Windows Server 2012 Release Candidate. The purpose of TechEd is not to announce major new features: it's to get Windows admins and developers ready for the imminent future.

While once Microsoft might have put Linux in its crosshairs, these days, the target is VMware. Hyper-V 3 may not be able to match VMware vSphere 5 in every possible regard, but it's much closer than past versions. Hyper-V is already the default choice for many Windows-only shops, and Hyper-V 3 will only extend Redmond's reach. Major stumbling blocks with the current version, such as the lack of live migration, have been addressed, meaning that even more organizations will be able to move away from the "VMware tax."

Redmond is also being smart in its embrace of heterogeneous datacenters: System Center Virtual Machine Manager 2012, the imminent update to its virtual machine management platform, can manage Citrix's XenServer and VMware ESXi in addition to Hyper-V, allowing easier migration to Microsoft's platform, or even the long-term use of mixed environments to avoid lock-in.

Microsoft is out to eat VMware's lunch, and it needs admins on-board to do this to create "private clouds." The TechEd audience gave what they saw a warm reception, but their mere attendance at the event shows that they're that bit more dedicated to, or at least, interested in, what Microsoft has to offer.

The reception among other admins may be a little frostier. The demos today avoided all the more contentious parts of Windows Server 2012 and showed the platform in the best possible light. Readers of our Server Room forum are a little more concerned—they're keen on the features, but not happy with the use of the Metro interface.

Windows Intune 3 and Visual Studio LightSwitch

In addition to the tour of Windows Server 2012, Microsoft also announced that its cloud-based management and security software, Windows Intune 3, has gone live after a beta release in April. Major new features include management of mobile devices and Active Directory integration.

Intune mobile device management supports Windows Phone, Android 2.1 and up, and iOS 4 and up. It provides a front-end for administration of ActiveSync policies such as device encryption and password strength. On iOS and Android devices, Intune 3 can also be used to deploy line-of-business applications.

The other announcement was that Visual Studio LightSwitch has been updated to include support for HTML output. LightSwitch enables rapid development of data-driven line-of-business applications. Previously it supported creation of Silverlight applications and deployment to Azure; the update brings the ability to create standard HTML front-ends, suitable for both desktop and mobile users.

While this addresses one concern with LightSwitch—Silverlight's future is uncertain, making the purpose of a program that creates Silverlight apps unclear—the new HTML support still doesn't address the product's bigger market problems: professional developers find it too simplistic, but nonprofessional developers don't know it even exists and probably can't get access to it anyway.

33 Reader Comments

System Center Virtual Machine Manager 2012, the imminent update to its virtual machine management platform, can manage Citrix's XenServer and VMware ESX in addition to Hyper-V

I assume you meant to include ESXi since ESX is effectively discontinued going forward? Otherwise this is less impressive. And why not also include KVM (which in its simplest requires only SSH and virsh commands)?

I really like LightSwitch as an accountant. However, I'm an accountant with a CS degree, so I'm probably a tiny market (plus I never paid for it, just tried it through the 90 day trial and couldn't get my firm to shell out the $299 for what I essentially used to make something nicer than a spreadsheet but not really that much more functional).

Visual Studio 2012: LightSwitch now includedVisual Studio LightSwitch provides a comprehensive solution for developers of all skill levels to build line-of-business applications quickly and easily for the desktop and cloud. Released last year as an out-of-band release, LightSwitch now joins the Visual Studio product line. With this integration, LightSwitch will be available through Visual Studio Professional 2012, Premium and Ultimate. Aligned with this release, LightSwitch will have a more advanced set of development tools, better integration with the Visual Studio family and the ability to create or compose services that can be consumed by any device or application.

I really like LightSwitch as an accountant. However, I'm an accountant with a CS degree, so I'm probably a tiny market (plus I never paid for it, just tried it through the 90 day trial and couldn't get my firm to shell out the $299 for what I essentially used to make something nicer than a spreadsheet but not really that much more functional).

Indeed. I think it needs to be part of Office, not a freebie with Visual Studio Professional or a $299 standalone product.

System Center Virtual Machine Manager 2012, the imminent update to its virtual machine management platform, can manage Citrix's XenServer and VMware ESX in addition to Hyper-V/quote]

I assume you meant to include ESXi since ESX is effectively discontinued going forward? Otherwise this is less impressive. And why not also include KVM (which in its simplest requires only SSH and virsh commands)?

Actually, since the only management interface that VMware supports is VCenter, that's really what VMM 2012 targets...but yeah, it essentially means ESXi at this point for the reasons you said. I'd suspect KVM to come in the future, assuming they can get a vendor to agree to be the support contact for it. MS has been pretty consistent the last few years with that. They'll pick up a popular distro or tool, as long as they have someone they can call to get support on the other end. Hence why RHEL, SUSE, CentOS, Unbuntu are supported on Hyper-V...but not say, Debian.

Peter... just because someone doesn't say something, doesn't mean things are up in the air. You've done this a few times is a number of MS subjects - where you create a story based on things you aren't given responses to (WP8 on the latest devices for instance)... that's not 'up in the air'... that's 'making things up' to write a story.

It wouldn't hurt to hold off on saying something until there's something to talk about..

It's been 8 months since your 'Silverlight is dead and Microsoft hates developers' story and yet it is still alive and kicking and expanding.....

If you're going to "kill" a technology and hate your developers, giving them 10 years to figure out what to do is a hell of a lot better than anyone else in the industry. (Though feel free to prove me wrong.)

As long as Windows 8/2012 require MetroUI, I will stick with 7/2008R2.

You don't actually need to interact with Metro on Server 2012 after the initial setup. From what I understand most everything can be done through Powershell or from the admin utils on a Windows 7 PC.

In a more on topic note, it seems to me that Microsoft isn't just gunning for VMWare; with Storage Pools/Spaces it seems to me like Microsoft is also gunning for some of the storage market too. I mean using Server 2012 and one of Supermicro's big multi HDD chassis (one supports something like 72 2.5" drives) I could whitebox my own NAS probably for less than it would cost me to purchase one.

If you're going to "kill" a technology and hate your developers, giving them 10 years to figure out what to do is a hell of a lot better than anyone else in the industry. (Though feel free to prove me wrong.)

That to me sounds like "it's the final version" from Microsoft. Why support it for 10 years if version 6 is coming out soon and everyone should install that? They haven't done it for any previous version at all.

Plus it's a web technology. Microsoft could pull the plug tomorrow and announce no more development, but it'll still be used for years to come. If they didn't patch it for security it could create all sorts of issues, as it'll still be installed on millions of computers and used by a whole lot of dormant websites sitting on servers that probably don't want to be compromised.

If you're going to "kill" a technology and hate your developers, giving them 10 years to figure out what to do is a hell of a lot better than anyone else in the industry. (Though feel free to prove me wrong.)

to me that sounds like a promise... lets say that yes Silverlight would be dissolved in 10 years... that's the most amazing commitment to technology I've seen in a long time. How long has Gnome 3 been around.... how long has KDE 4 been around and supported (hell 4.1 and 4.2 were completely useless!!)...for MS to say that they will support Silverlight developers for the next 10 years is amazing

I don't care if SL is dissolved or not... I personally hate the plugin versions of the web... but to say that they wont be supported is stupid.....

Peter... just because someone doesn't say something, doesn't mean things are up in the air. You've done this a few times is a number of MS subjects - where you create a story based on things you aren't given responses to (WP8 on the latest devices for instance)... that's not 'up in the air'... that's 'making things up' to write a story.

No, it's reporting what I've been told by insiders and what Microsoft won't talk about.

Quote:

It's been 8 months since your 'Silverlight is dead and Microsoft hates developers' story and yet it is still alive and kicking and expanding.....

Expanding? It's not even available in the Metro browser in Windows 8. Flash is.

As long as Windows 8/2012 require MetroUI, I will stick with 7/2008R2.

You don't actually need to interact with Metro on Server 2012 after the initial setup. From what I understand most everything can be done through Powershell or from the admin utils on a Windows 7 PC.

In a more on topic note, it seems to me that Microsoft isn't just gunning for VMWare; with Storage Pools/Spaces it seems to me like Microsoft is also gunning for some of the storage market too. I mean using Server 2012 and one of Supermicro's big multi HDD chassis (one supports something like 72 2.5" drives) I could whitebox my own NAS probably for less than it would cost me to purchase one.

This is true, to an extent, but I think Storage Spaces (and ReFS) will be very much a version 1.0 technology. Much like Hyper-V when it was introduced in Windows Server 2008, really.

You don't actually understand how often admins quickly launch programs from the start menu. Now with Server 2012 they get kicked into metro every time they do.

Again, what are you doing remote desktop-ed into your servers? In almost every circumstance, you shouldn't be. One of the few things I can think of is Device Manager, because that still only works in read only mode remotely under 2008R2.

You don't actually understand how often admins quickly launch programs from the start menu. Now with Server 2012 they get kicked into metro every time they do.

Again, what are you doing remote desktop-ed into your servers? In almost every circumstance, you shouldn't be. One of the few things I can think of is Device Manager, because that still only works in read only mode remotely under 2008R2.

I'm not even mentioning the fact that you shouldn't use use a domain admin account on your workstation and thus you'll typically need to log into a machine with another account in order to make any work at all.

In the end, it's simply easier to remote onto a server than to try to manage it remotely and it's also typically faster too.

You don't actually understand how often admins quickly launch programs from the start menu. Now with Server 2012 they get kicked into metro every time they do.

Again, what are you doing remote desktop-ed into your servers? In almost every circumstance, you shouldn't be. One of the few things I can think of is Device Manager, because that still only works in read only mode remotely under 2008R2.

I'm not even mentioning the fact that you shouldn't use use a domain admin account on your workstation and thus you'll typically need to log into a machine with another account in order to make any work at all.

In the end, it's simply easier to remote onto a server than to try to manage it remotely and it's also typically faster too.

...and that's why folks are saying not every server admin is paying attention. That article is about 2008 R2, which is an entirely different creature. There are plenty of things that need to be done locally. It's just not true anymore in Server 2012. There's a REMOTEABLE PowerShell Cmdlet for literally everything I have needed to do so far. It's amazing.

I manage literally thousands of servers, and I am beyond excited by Server 2012 because for the first time ever, there does not appear to be ANY function that I cannot do remotely with PowerShell, and across dozens or hundreds of machines at once. It is probably the closest I have come to an administrator-gasm in my life. Thinking you need the GUI and that Metro slows you down is entirely missing the point of the new administrative interfaces in Server 2012. It's an administrators best dreams come true.

You don't actually understand how often admins quickly launch programs from the start menu. Now with Server 2012 they get kicked into metro every time they do.

Again, what are you doing remote desktop-ed into your servers? In almost every circumstance, you shouldn't be. One of the few things I can think of is Device Manager, because that still only works in read only mode remotely under 2008R2.

Tell that to the third party application vendors whos applications I have to administer that require you to run the admin tools on the same Windows machine that the services are running on. Most days I need to have at least one remote sessions to one of these servers open. On a bad day I need to have 10-15 remote sessions open at a time.

It is great if you live in an all Microsoft world, but many of us do not.

All that said based on the sessions I have attended so far it looks like Windows 2012, VS 2012 and TFS 2012 have some very cool new features.

Tell that to the third party application vendors whos applications I have to administer that require you to run the admin tools on the same Windows machine that the services are running on. Most days I need to have at least one remote sessions to one of these servers open. On a bad day I need to have 10-15 remote sessions open at a time.

That's a fair point.

Honestly though, on a server like that, you'll have at the most, 6 different admin applications that MUST be run locally? (That's probably high too, but I'm saying worst-case) When they're installed, those applications automatically go onto the Metro start screen, and since there is very little on the Server Metro screen to begin with, they're right in front. So to start those admin applications, you go to the bottom left corner, click "start" and then you launch the application. Is it REALLY a hardship? Is it really adding so much overhead to administrative functions? It just feels like people want to bitch about Metro, regardless of how little it matters for the next version of Server.

You don't actually understand how often admins quickly launch programs from the start menu. Now with Server 2012 they get kicked into metro every time they do.

Again, what are you doing remote desktop-ed into your servers? In almost every circumstance, you shouldn't be. One of the few things I can think of is Device Manager, because that still only works in read only mode remotely under 2008R2.

I'm not even mentioning the fact that you shouldn't use use a domain admin account on your workstation and thus you'll typically need to log into a machine with another account in order to make any work at all.

In the end, it's simply easier to remote onto a server than to try to manage it remotely and it's also typically faster too.

...and that's why folks are saying not every server admin is paying attention. That article is about 2008 R2, which is an entirely different creature. There are plenty of things that need to be done locally. It's just not true anymore in Server 2012. There's a REMOTEABLE PowerShell Cmdlet for literally everything I have needed to do so far. It's amazing.

PowerShell is great when you need to do the same thing on a bunch of machines.

It's not even close to great when you need to do ad hoc or one-off tasks.

PowerShell is great when you need to do the same thing on a bunch of machines.

It's not even close to great when you need to do ad hoc or one-off tasks.

I'll concede that using an unfamiliar scripting language is far less quick than a GUI that you are intimately familiar with.

Two points:

1) The new cmdlets in PowerShell in Server 2012 make it a lot less painful than it was in 2008 R2, where you had to be intimately familiar with WMI to get many tasks done. That was not good enough, not discoverable enough, and not easy. However, even some crazy complex actions are now bundled in a single cmdlet that is self-describing. The scope of PowerShell in 2012 is epic.2) Big picture operational learning. I have found that once you start looking at your operations holistically across a number of servers, the number of truly one-off tasks dwindles to almost vanishing. You may not do them repeatedly or on multiple systems at once, but chances are you do the same task on different systems with different inputs multiple times. There are very few truly once-ever tasks. That means consolidating the task into a runbook, workflow, or script almost always pays dividends. Almost every task we do in our datacenter now gets examined for repeatability and turned into a runbook so we can repeat it automatically or with a single command to initiate it. A lot of those runbooks use PowerShell to make the magic happen.

You don't actually understand how often admins quickly launch programs from the start menu. Now with Server 2012 they get kicked into metro every time they do.

Again, what are you doing remote desktop-ed into your servers? In almost every circumstance, you shouldn't be. One of the few things I can think of is Device Manager, because that still only works in read only mode remotely under 2008R2.

I use a Mac, so I have to remote into the servers.

I hate, hate, hate the Metro UI on the server. I'm not upgrading my servers for a long time, unless its fixed.

I hate, hate, hate the Metro UI on the server. I'm not upgrading my servers for a long time, unless its fixed.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that you're not actually responsible for many servers in total if your IT department makes server decisions based on the type of GUI, and not what it can actually do as a server.

In small networks it's usually more efficient to remote into a server. If you have to manage lots of small networks (think different SMB customers that have - shudder - SBS or a couple of DC's, Exchange and some application servers) Powershell just doesn't cut it. Because a lot of tasks are one offs people like me do not get very familiar with Powershell. Learning how to use Powershell efficiently is not efficient as it takes too much time for virtually no return. Googling for that one command you need is actually faster. The power of Powershell is only useful in larger environments. In small shops Powershell often slows admins down and the GUI is faster. And Murphy says that one machine that has all the tools installed will NEVER be available at the customer when you need it...

Still, I'm very excited for 2012 and especially Hyper-V 3.0 and a GUI for recovering deleted AD objects. Can't say the GUI bothers me. I wonder how long Citrix will take to get a XenApp version to run on 2012 and how fast touch enabled apps will become available for practical use. Imagine streaming apps or a touchfriendly desktop to a tablet.... Hmmm... Xeon power available and USABLE on a tablet would be awesome.

If you dismiss a server OS simply because you don't like the GUI then you should find another line of work. Or just go fully CLI. There are too many improvements in 2012 for making silly statements like you did.

In small networks it's usually more efficient to remote into a server. If you have to manage lots of small networks (think different SMB customers that have - shudder - SBS or a couple of DC's, Exchange and some application servers) Powershell just doesn't cut it. Because a lot of tasks are one offs people like me do not get very familiar with Powershell. Learning how to use Powershell efficiently is not efficient as it takes too much time for virtually no return. Googling for that one command you need is actually faster. The power of Powershell is only useful in larger environments. In small shops Powershell often slows admins down and the GUI is faster. And Murphy says that one machine that has all the tools installed will NEVER be available at the customer when you need it...

Still, I'm very excited for 2012 and especially Hyper-V 3.0 and a GUI for recovering deleted AD objects. Can't say the GUI bothers me. I wonder how long Citrix will take to get a XenApp version to run on 2012 and how fast touch enabled apps will become available for practical use. Imagine streaming apps or a touchfriendly desktop to a tablet.... Hmmm... Xeon power available and USABLE on a tablet would be awesome.

Yes, if you're responsible for a small shop and wear a lot of non-IT hats, I think that's a reasonable argument. I don't think PowerShell is the ultimate answer for everyone for that reason. However, I also don't think Metro is going to be detrimental to administration of servers even in small environments because the tools are still the same, Win32/64 are still there, MMC still works. It's a new start menu, not a fundamental break in how servers work.

PowerShell is great when you need to do the same thing on a bunch of machines.

It's not even close to great when you need to do ad hoc or one-off tasks.

I can't believe I'm actually agreeing with Peter, but this is essentially correct. There are a lot of times dealing with once off tasks or troubleshooting where a GUI is far more intuitive and efficient. That certain options are grouped together on a tab provide contextual clues that are completely absent in PowerShell.

I love PowerShell, and I have many scripts that I've created to automate all sorts of tasks, but I'm constantly running across new commandlets and parameters that I didn't know existed (and given the lack of Google results few others did either).

As an example, I could create a SQL database, add a group for permissions, and assign that group the proper permissions on that database, all in PowerShell. I could do that. Or I could use the GUI to do it in a fraction of the time that it would take to figure out the correct PS syntax, and still be less likely to screw something up.

...and that's why folks are saying not every server admin is paying attention. That article is about 2008 R2, which is an entirely different creature. There are plenty of things that need to be done locally. It's just not true anymore in Server 2012. There's a REMOTEABLE PowerShell Cmdlet for literally everything I have needed to do so far. It's amazing.

Talk about paying attention: read the thread and you'll see that that part was talking about current activity. So unless you're using a time machine and posting from 2014 or working at MS on a BING server farm, that means windows 2008R2 at best.

Quote:

As an example, I could create a SQL database, add a group for permissions, and assign that group the proper permissions on that database, all in PowerShell. I could do that. Or I could use the GUI to do it in a fraction of the time that it would take to figure out the correct PS syntax, and still be less likely to screw something up.

That's why you use GUI for these kind of things, really.

PS is, in many way, a real improvement over the old batch but up until now, it was always held back by the fact that you were pretty much ALWAYS missing a commandlet for any non-trivial task you wanted to do and had to rely on 3rd-party commandlets (hard to deploy) and WMI (which makes VI looks positively user-friendly).

MS is definitely heading in the right direction there. Now we'll need a PS 3.0 version available on 2008+ servers as well so we can actually make use of all these nice things

Quote:

If you dismiss a server OS simply because you don't like the GUI then you should find another line of work. Or just go fully CLI. There are too many improvements in 2012 for making silly statements like you did.

I agree with the root of that idea (the GUI is really not the most oimportant part of a server OS - except when you're using it as a RemoteDesktop app server) but I'm sure you'll understand that we all wish to have a comfortable work environment too. If the UI is always getting in the way of your work as an admin instead of helping you, it might not make it impossible to use the system (or diminish its other qualities), but it sure doesn't make the admin enjoy his work.

Combine the best of both worlds like you can in Exchange, use the GUI to do the task once and script out the resultant generated powershell scripts. Open an editor, turn it into a reusable script and there's one less time you need to use the GUI.

Funny how a Linux guy will rant and rave about the command line in a tiny Linux shop or a massive Linux farm, but the Windows administrators are fighting tooth and nail to keep the GUI while bitching about any GUI changes coming down the pipe. If your Exchange guys are still using the GUI and you run 2007 or 2010 they need to be fired. In 2012, your AD guys fall in the same category. Powershell 2.0 is perfectly suitable to AD tasks.

Download PowerGUI and use the Script Editor and Administrator console to generate scripts for every day tasks. I for one welcome our new command line overlords...

Frankly, with Team Foundation Server 11, MS Build and automated testing using Hyper-V, every developer will get to know Powershell. Of all the technologies Microsoft is embracing big time, Powershell has to be one of the biggest. It permeates everything they offer making GUI front ends mostly for discoverability of commands and for people that don't want to evolve.

Sharepoint, Exchange, Visual Studio, TFS 2010/11, Sql Server and the OS are all manageable using Powershell and I'm sure I forgot many more applications in use throughout the Microsoft ecosystem.

Point I'm making is see the writing on the wall, quit bitching about the UI and adapt. Microsoft is not going to step backwards so you can feel comfortable.

Funny how a Linux guy will rant and rave about the command line in a tiny Linux shop or a massive Linux farm, but the Windows administrators are fighting tooth and nail to keep the GUI while bitching about any GUI changes coming down the pipe.

I don't know in what world you're living but, in mine, Windows admins are all for having a nice command-line system (at least the one that didn't retire on the other side of the y2k bug). What admins wants is the right tool for the right job. This means that there are cases when the command-line is superior to the GUI and cases when it's the reverse.

Quote:

If your Exchange guys are still using the GUI and you run 2007 or 2010 they need to be fired. In 2012, your AD guys fall in the same category. Powershell 2.0 is perfectly suitable to AD tasks.

No it's not. It's perfectly suitable for scripting thing but, as you yourself said, it's not suited for unique tasks and things that require discovery. In these cases, the GUI is king.